Examining the Ethiopian Corruption Crimes Proclamation: Focus on Private Sector Regulation
| dc.contributor.advisor | Kiros, Simeneh (Asst.Pro) | |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Kiros, Simeneh (Asst. Pro) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mohammed , Hussen | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-09T09:05:03Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-11-08T11:44:13Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-09-09T09:05:03Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-08T11:44:13Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-06 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Since the drafting of the Corruption Crimes Proclamation, the rationale behind of the law has been challenged by objection in light of the private sector regulation. In this regard the major criticism has been the non-existence of administrative power in the private sector and necessity of the proclamation to the sector. This study is aimed at examining the proclamation in general to assess the scope of its application, the law-making process, and to investigate whether it is consistent with criminal law principles and international bill of rights in which Ethiopia is a party. Qualitative data gathering techniques are employed to undertake mixed research. Using purposive sampling technique, 2 drafters of the proclamation are selected for an in-depth interview, mainly to get adequate data that can enable the researcher to examine the purpose, the law-making process, and the scope of application of the proclamation. The study has revealed that there is a discrepancy between the legal rationales stated in the preamble of the proclamation to justify its purpose with that of the similarity of the corruption crimes in public and private sector, the principle of necessity and the principles of ultima ratio (criminal law as a last resort). Hence, the justifications are disproved due to the similarity of the acts and are found inconsistent with the CM Directive, the regulation of the HPR, and with accepted criminal law drafting/making process. Moreover, the law cited both AUCPCC and UNCAC to support its rationales, but they are found to be inconsistent. The study also has concluded that the HPR has enacted this proclamation without deep examination, and has failed to fulfill the governing rules of the law-making process. The purpose of the proclamation is not compatible with international criminal law principles and with the international bill of rights which Ethiopia is a party and also with the FDRE Constitution, Article 17(1). | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://etd.aau.edu.et/handle/123456789/22294 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.publisher | AAU | en_US |
| dc.subject | Corruption,Private Sector,Corruption Crimes Proclamation | en_US |
| dc.title | Examining the Ethiopian Corruption Crimes Proclamation: Focus on Private Sector Regulation | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |